Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

terroist children

last reply
78 replies
3.4k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by GnV
But not too enigmatic .... :twisted: :twisted: lol :lol: :notes::cheers:

Is that something to do with Cryptanalysis Stagss....
or Kryptonite even...
You do have superhuman power after all wink
SSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! I'm in Clark Kent mode at the moment
yes, imprison children and their parents for stealing widescreen tv's, burning and looting shops, but let blair, brown, bush, obama, pearl, rumsfeld, cheney, wolferwitz, cameron and clegg free for bombing and invading afghanistan, iraq, pakistan, yemen and libya. destroying schools, hospitals, universities, power stations, bridges, roads, sewarage works and all manner of infrastructure and kill civilians by the hundreds of thousands all based on lies and deciept. yes, excellent hipocracy here. lay waste our industrial heretage and throw millions out of work with no future, training or education while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
take away all pensions and benefits and blame the disenchanted have nots for criminality and opportunism. like i said a couple of years ago "there is a steam train headed are way" and "you aint seen nothing yet". doo doo
Quote by gulsonroad30664
yes, imprison children and their parents for stealing widescreen tv's, burning and looting shops, but let blair, brown, bush, obama, pearl, rumsfeld, cheney, wolferwitz, cameron and clegg free for bombing and invading afghanistan, iraq, pakistan, yemen and libya. destroying schools, hospitals, universities, power stations, bridges, roads, sewarage works and all manner of infrastructure and kill civilians by the hundreds of thousands all based on lies and deciept. yes, excellent hipocracy here. lay waste our industrial heretage and throw millions out of work with no future, training or education while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
take away all pensions and benefits and blame the disenchanted have nots for criminality and opportunism. like i said a couple of years ago "there is a steam train headed are way" and "you aint seen nothing yet". doo doo

would help if you edited your posts and learnt to spell rolleyes
I guess your multi-million pound pad didn't get raided then gulson.
Troll Troll Troll :roll:
Quote by GnV
yes, imprison children and their parents for stealing widescreen tv's, burning and looting shops, but let blair, brown, bush, obama, pearl, rumsfeld, cheney, wolferwitz, cameron and clegg free for bombing and invading afghanistan, iraq, pakistan, yemen and libya. destroying schools, hospitals, universities, power stations, bridges, roads, sewarage works and all manner of infrastructure and kill civilians by the hundreds of thousands all based on lies and deciept. yes, excellent hipocracy here. lay waste our industrial heretage and throw millions out of work with no future, training or education while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
take away all pensions and benefits and blame the disenchanted have nots for criminality and opportunism. like i said a couple of years ago "there is a steam train headed are way" and "you aint seen nothing yet". doo doo

would help if you edited your posts and learnt to spell rolleyes
I guess your multi-million pound pad didn't get raided then gulson.
Troll Troll Troll :roll:
On the strength of these two posts G it doesn't look like Gulson who's the troll .... If he's wrong why not try to say where ... thing is he's not (in this case) so all you've got is to slag of his spelling .... shame

Come on GnV, I expected better of you than that?
Is he wrong?
N x x x ;)
Is who wrong Neil? Staggers or Gulsonroad?
Actually it doesn't really matter as they are both expressing their point of view which others may well not agree with.
Obviously your viewpoint will dictate who you believe to be right but again others may see things differently. So who's to say who's right and who's wrong?
As much as people keep banging on about the bankers, no matter how immoral they may have acted, they did not ( as far as I'm aware) break any laws. The executive of the banks were very probably guilty of gross negligence but can that really be equated with rioting, looting, killing innocent people and burning people's homes and businesses to the ground?.
Can peoples protesting against and trying to overthrow long standing dictatorships be equated against rioters, looters, murderers and arsonists?
Obviously Gulson thinks so.
Max, either of them, or both? Whichever of them is prepared to defend a point of view? Guess I was driving at that whole 'expressing a point of view' thing meself?
I guess I was just asking GnV to play the ball, and not the man, which is what he appeared to be doing. It's the first refuge of someone with nothing to say. T'is ironic really, someone pulling someone else up in a pedantic kinda way on their literary skill, who then resorts to posting a picture they found on the internet by way of the last word? It begs the question, what's the point of posting that then? They could equally well choose not to post anything at all, and it would make as much of a contribution? i.e. None whatsoever.
N x x x ;)
Well neil, in a kinda pedantic sort of way, what Staggs wrote (and I do appreciate and respect his views from time to time) was closer to the mark than was comfortable. Not by way of apology, excuse or regret but more by way of explanation, the posting he was responding to was way too rushed and not to my usual cutting edge standard.
But, being brutally frank, after thinking about his contribution for a few days (following the SH guidelines) and then measuring it against my long time held view that gulson is a phucking fruitcake, I decided I couldn't be arsed to explain myself or give further credence to gulson's various idiotic ramblings and that it really wasn't worth the effort.
I was actually looking for a "hands up" smiley for Staggs benefit to acknowledge his point but couldn't find one suitable that would convey the correct meaning. In the course of looking however, I came across the one I posted and as it reminded me of tweeky it seemed appropriate.
A bit like the thread itself really; it morphed into something else. But you are quite right neil, I have nothing further to say about gulson and I am angry with myself for breaking an earlier pledge not to make any further postings about his ridiculous claims.
Quote by on the 6th april 2011 max
You're a fine one to request hard evidence. You've never yet produced any evidence to support the conspiracy theories you constantly repeat in these forums, despite repeated requests to do so.
In who's interest do YOU serve?
(when answering gulson in another thred).

from what i have read that is the only evidence i need to see.
if you are a fortune teller telling peeple bollocks day in and day out, the law of averages must be that you get it right on occasion. but most of the time it is still rubbish.
the problem that i see with gulson is it is the same stuff over and over again. most of it to me makes no sense at all.
he hates the banks and thinks they are all theeves, dont we all. but the rest is just based on non existent conspirecy theories of which as max has pointed out many times, the theories have no base of fact at all. unless he wants to prove differantly which on most occasions he cleerly does not/will not do.
from what i see on here gnv has no need to say sorry for any thing at all. peeple rubbish peeple and there spelling all the time, and i have been the brunt of that one but never have i seen any one say sorry for it. :notes:
Quote by neilinleeds
Max, either of them, or both? Whichever of them is prepared to defend a point of view? Guess I was driving at that whole 'expressing a point of view' thing meself?
N x x x ;)

The thing is Neil, Gulson is the main culprit of being one not prepared to defend his point of view. He has never answered a direct question put to him in response to his postings, including yours after his rantings on the Norwegian massacre. Where are the voices demanding answers to all those unanswerd questions?
Quote by flower411
Max, either of them, or both? Whichever of them is prepared to defend a point of view? Guess I was driving at that whole 'expressing a point of view' thing meself?
N x x x ;)

The thing is Neil, Gulson is the main culprit of being one not prepared to defend his point of view. He has never answered a direct question put to him in response to his postings, including yours after his rantings on the Norwegian massacre. Where are the voices demanding answers to all those unanswerd questions?
And the question needs to be asked "why does anybody care?"
If everything Gulson is saying is such a load of rubbish, why don`t people just ignore and move on ?
Maybe a little bit of everybody hurling the abuse really understands the underlying truth behind what at times appears to be incoherent rantings.
If people were more prepared to discuss themes and ideas rather simply calling people names because they disagree with their views this would be a livlier place. But there are trolls on here who are unable to build a coherent argument and simply resort to name calling.....
The lack of moderation here is a shame and if the name callers were removed it may encourage others to make their views known.
I don`t believe anybodies views can be proven via the internet .....given time I could google any amount of "proof" in support of my own prejudices...it wouldn`t stop them from being prejudices !!
It would be nice for people to discuss ideas in here because we sometimes assume that the people we are dealing with have taken a decision to function outside of the normal acceptable moral codes imposed upon us by the rest of society...
Unfortunately this is not the case ......people in here appear to be even more opposed to a live and live attitude than on any other forum I`ve ever posted on .
It's frightening when Flower talks sense ..... stop it and slag someone off ffs!!
Quote by flower411
Max, either of them, or both? Whichever of them is prepared to defend a point of view? Guess I was driving at that whole 'expressing a point of view' thing meself?
N x x x ;)

The thing is Neil, Gulson is the main culprit of being one not prepared to defend his point of view. He has never answered a direct question put to him in response to his postings, including yours after his rantings on the Norwegian massacre. Where are the voices demanding answers to all those unanswerd questions?
And the question needs to be asked "why does anybody care?"
Does that question need to be asked? If so, why not ask Neil...he was the one asking the question of question I was asking is why not have some consistency?
If everything Gulson is saying is such a load of rubbish, why don`t people just ignore and move on ?
I think that's what most people are doing now
Maybe a little bit of everybody hurling the abuse really understands the underlying truth behind what at times appears to be incoherent rantings.
If people were more prepared to discuss themes and ideas rather simply calling people names because they disagree with their views this would be a livlier place. But there are trolls on here who are unable to build a coherent argument and simply resort to name calling.....
That's the whole point Flower. The one person not prepared to discuss themes and ideas is Gulsonroad. I totally agree with you about the fact there are trolls in here who are unable to build a coherent argument. Thank you for supporting my viewpoint..
The lack of moderation here is a shame and if the name callers were removed it may encourage others to make their views known.
That's a huge U turn.......
I don`t believe anybodies views can be proven via the internet .....given time I could google any amount of "proof" in support of my own prejudices...it wouldn`t stop them from being prejudices !!
Once again, I'm in total agreement with you Flower. However it's totally different with repeated claims being stated as "fact". They can and have frequently been disputed with valid argument and proof but that doesn't stop these claims being repeatedly posted without any proof or valid argument in support by the poster. Trolling some would say.
It would be nice for people to discuss ideas in here because we sometimes assume that the people we are dealing with have taken a decision to function outside of the normal acceptable moral codes imposed upon us by the rest of society...
Unfortunately this is not the case ......people in here appear to be even more opposed to a live and live attitude than on any other forum I`ve ever posted on
Yes, possibly very true........pots and kettles and all that
.